Not for nothing: Bluffton today is the best website we've been forced to visit this semester.
It's an interesting piece of money-making technology that I actually am very interested in (HINT: I registered with the site, and hope to blog as often as I can). There are many ways that the site makes money:
First, and probably most blah, is the ads. They're everywhere, which is typical of this type of site, amongst others. One notable piece of ad-throat-stuffing is this non-pop-up popup, which does not register as a new window, but as a free floating image (or whatever it may be). I'm guessing even if you click the "close" button on the upper right hand corner of the image, it's still registering it as a view/interaction, and the site gets paid off it. Clever clever.
Secondly, and most important, is it's user interactivity. This is a major driving point of what the site has to offer. There are so many cool features on this site that make the user actually want to contribute. The first thing I noticed was the masthead photo of the mainpage: provided and created by a user registered with the site. That is an awesome part of Blufftontoday.com. The ability to take my own personal photo, and have it welcome users to the site. Secondly, user blogs, separated in catagories "community", "expert" and "staff", are directly posted in an easy to read, photo-enhanced (when supplied by blogger) portion of the site. Isn't that the appeal of wanting to become a journalist/writer : have your work read by others? This way, it's right there for people to look at. Simple.
Another portion that is really interesting is that Bluffton owns the rights to the blogs, and can choose to use them for print newspaper. This is good, and bad. For starters, a person's blog, which could include an informed rant on why you should steam vegetables rather than boil, can wind up on the front page of the Health section of the newspaper, forever immortalized (a bit overdramatic, I know) in print. Now, you don't have to professional journalists to be print published. However, on the flip side of the same coin, Bluffton owns the rights to your blogs, your personal blogs. Even if you don't want it to be published in print, they still can. Plus, they make money off of it, and you don't see a dime. This is another way the site/paper makes money: a significant amount of user-generated content.
This site differs from others in style. It's a lot simpler in shape and form, and does not rely heavily on multimedia and their own created images. rather, most of the content and reason to come to the site is to read what others in the community have to say. Bluffton is a great site, with great potential.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Monday, March 19, 2007
Honk if you love lists!
::beep beep::
This list are four YouTube reasons why we, as a society of people, are going straight to hell. No judgement day, no attonement for sin. Straight up Satan and Saddam house party.
FOX News Challenges You ... You Moron:
The first, but certainly not the last appearance, on this list is brought to you by none other than FOX News. Not only do they have God fearing, Gay marriage debating, Red State parading believing that they will take them to the journalistic etopian promised land; they've dropped all subtlities and said that yes, you, average American, are dumber than a fifth grader. And who better to host the show than the comedy world's local slack jawed idiot: Jeff Foxworthy. Well slap my ass and call me a rootin' tootin' brain dead dummy. If you're still happy that Jeff Foxworthy is alive, you might be a red neck.
And God will Strike down upon thee with Greased Lighting:
If there was any indication that our fellow man has completely detached from reality, this has to be the red flag, with ten spotlights flashing brightly on it's crimson fury, while a man with a bullhorn is screaming "Fire! Rape! FIRE! RAPE", and shoots a firey flare on the flag, sending it into a blaze of glory. DO NOT, I REPEAT, DO NOT watch the entire clip, or you may just have an aneurysm and bite the big one right where you sit. The only chance of redemption is to parade Trekkies and people who think the Lord of the Rings is real right in front of the contestants, only to mock them on the fact that they will score more times than those greased idiots will after this travesty.
Anna Nicole Smith will not DIE!:
As floods and floods of new Anna Nicole Smith comes in, and new developments are in constant blah blah blah NO MORE! PLEASE NO MORE! Are we looking at the same video just an inch above this text? She's dead, but she's not? How messed up of a concept is that? And nobody cares about the baby, because everyone who remotely knows the track record of Anna Nicole Smith, that kid was doomed from the start. Jeez!
Now this is satire ... FOXIFIED!:
Just because you probably don't believe that a producer, tv crew, camera men, and their respective families posing as a pseudo live audience would actually put together 30 minutes of pure bullshit. FOX News doesn't understand the common thread between themselves, and their conservative audience: THEY AREN'T FUNNY! How is it possible to bomb this bad with a laugh track? If you listen carefully, there's a faint voice in the recycled track in the background that says, "man, this sucks." Imagine the brainstorming session that goes on behind the scenes at the "1/2 Hour News Hour", all the painstaking effort and craft that goes into the "gay penguin" punchline, or the genius pen stroke of the "BO Magazine" sketch. It brings a tear to my eye, that finally, republicans humble the bullying left with a barrage of carefully delivered zingers to finely attuned laugh track editing.
Welcome to the apocolypse folks.
This list are four YouTube reasons why we, as a society of people, are going straight to hell. No judgement day, no attonement for sin. Straight up Satan and Saddam house party.
FOX News Challenges You ... You Moron:
The first, but certainly not the last appearance, on this list is brought to you by none other than FOX News. Not only do they have God fearing, Gay marriage debating, Red State parading believing that they will take them to the journalistic etopian promised land; they've dropped all subtlities and said that yes, you, average American, are dumber than a fifth grader. And who better to host the show than the comedy world's local slack jawed idiot: Jeff Foxworthy. Well slap my ass and call me a rootin' tootin' brain dead dummy. If you're still happy that Jeff Foxworthy is alive, you might be a red neck.
And God will Strike down upon thee with Greased Lighting:
If there was any indication that our fellow man has completely detached from reality, this has to be the red flag, with ten spotlights flashing brightly on it's crimson fury, while a man with a bullhorn is screaming "Fire! Rape! FIRE! RAPE", and shoots a firey flare on the flag, sending it into a blaze of glory. DO NOT, I REPEAT, DO NOT watch the entire clip, or you may just have an aneurysm and bite the big one right where you sit. The only chance of redemption is to parade Trekkies and people who think the Lord of the Rings is real right in front of the contestants, only to mock them on the fact that they will score more times than those greased idiots will after this travesty.
Anna Nicole Smith will not DIE!:
As floods and floods of new Anna Nicole Smith comes in, and new developments are in constant blah blah blah NO MORE! PLEASE NO MORE! Are we looking at the same video just an inch above this text? She's dead, but she's not? How messed up of a concept is that? And nobody cares about the baby, because everyone who remotely knows the track record of Anna Nicole Smith, that kid was doomed from the start. Jeez!
Now this is satire ... FOXIFIED!:
Just because you probably don't believe that a producer, tv crew, camera men, and their respective families posing as a pseudo live audience would actually put together 30 minutes of pure bullshit. FOX News doesn't understand the common thread between themselves, and their conservative audience: THEY AREN'T FUNNY! How is it possible to bomb this bad with a laugh track? If you listen carefully, there's a faint voice in the recycled track in the background that says, "man, this sucks." Imagine the brainstorming session that goes on behind the scenes at the "1/2 Hour News Hour", all the painstaking effort and craft that goes into the "gay penguin" punchline, or the genius pen stroke of the "BO Magazine" sketch. It brings a tear to my eye, that finally, republicans humble the bullying left with a barrage of carefully delivered zingers to finely attuned laugh track editing.
Welcome to the apocolypse folks.
LJWorld.com
If you like bland, boring layout design, then I've got news for you loyal blog readers: LJWorld.com is you're tropical paradise. I'm not sure if the particular aim of the assignment was to find that there isn't any solid multimedia use by the mainsite (though lawrence.com is heavily dependent on different multimedias), it's virtually inexistant.
For starters, you cannot access any online content without registering with the website. Atleast in the case of the New York Times they give you a little sample of what you'd be reading.
Then, after registering (which I already can't stand to do in the first place), the articles are still inexcessable. Perhaps I caught LJWorld.com at a bad time. In any case, the inconveince to register already would turn away anyone who is not interested in being hassled. It's like the people at the register at a Compact Disc World forcing free magazine subscriptions on you when you're making a purchase with a credit card (I know, because I'm quite a pusher at my job).
For starters, you cannot access any online content without registering with the website. Atleast in the case of the New York Times they give you a little sample of what you'd be reading.
Then, after registering (which I already can't stand to do in the first place), the articles are still inexcessable. Perhaps I caught LJWorld.com at a bad time. In any case, the inconveince to register already would turn away anyone who is not interested in being hassled. It's like the people at the register at a Compact Disc World forcing free magazine subscriptions on you when you're making a purchase with a credit card (I know, because I'm quite a pusher at my job).
Nj.com
What does NJ.com love more than New Jersey? Money, you silly sap!
No shame on the part of the website in bombarding users with ads in virutally every part of the website. The top banner is 90% advertisements, leaving only a small portion of the left hand side to give the website any actual title. This impacts the user tremendously, making us believe that the site is used primarily to make money. Which, of course, is true with most websites out there.
Other media outlets contribute to the website, including The Star Ledger. You must login in by means of zip code through NJ.com to see any of the Star Ledger's online pages and news.
No shame on the part of the website in bombarding users with ads in virutally every part of the website. The top banner is 90% advertisements, leaving only a small portion of the left hand side to give the website any actual title. This impacts the user tremendously, making us believe that the site is used primarily to make money. Which, of course, is true with most websites out there.
Other media outlets contribute to the website, including The Star Ledger. You must login in by means of zip code through NJ.com to see any of the Star Ledger's online pages and news.
The Buzz Behind Buzzmachine
Jeff Jarvis is an supporter of new media. That's pretty much a "duh" understanding that you get once you start reading his blog. Many of his current jobs and ventures deal with online journalism, though he is able to separate blogging and journalism as two separate entities. You get the impression that he doesn't completely dislike print newspapers, but rather sees the short comings and the potential to improve.
Some of his blogs include praises for new media avenues, like YouTube, where common citizens can post questions for presidential candidates to respond to. In this case, Jarvis relishes in the active uses of interactive journalism. It allows people who would otherwise not have a voice to be able to be heard. He also urges many of his own readers to become socially and politically active via media tools such as YouTube.
On the flip side, reading back into the archives, he sees the perils of such new technologies. He critizes Pay Per Post, a pay-by-blog website that allows users to post opinions on products such as cameras or computers. Jarvis feels that this is a complete unethical exploitation of the sites non-liability sentiments for their content.
Both viewpoints are valid, but certainly not new by any stretch. Up and coming technologies that offer a great deal of positive benefits always are not without some negative aspects. What I take from Jarvis' opinions is that money is ultimately the driving force behind either point, regardless of ethical intentions. It's cheaper for Senator McCain to have citizens post their questions, and respond to them online, rather than assemble a costly press conference. Likewise, Pay Per Post will gain ad revenue by the product companies in which are most favorable to their own content, without having to produce any original content of their own.
Technology flawed. It's a prevalent, yet unfortuanate, aspect of our current day society.
Some of his blogs include praises for new media avenues, like YouTube, where common citizens can post questions for presidential candidates to respond to. In this case, Jarvis relishes in the active uses of interactive journalism. It allows people who would otherwise not have a voice to be able to be heard. He also urges many of his own readers to become socially and politically active via media tools such as YouTube.
On the flip side, reading back into the archives, he sees the perils of such new technologies. He critizes Pay Per Post, a pay-by-blog website that allows users to post opinions on products such as cameras or computers. Jarvis feels that this is a complete unethical exploitation of the sites non-liability sentiments for their content.
Both viewpoints are valid, but certainly not new by any stretch. Up and coming technologies that offer a great deal of positive benefits always are not without some negative aspects. What I take from Jarvis' opinions is that money is ultimately the driving force behind either point, regardless of ethical intentions. It's cheaper for Senator McCain to have citizens post their questions, and respond to them online, rather than assemble a costly press conference. Likewise, Pay Per Post will gain ad revenue by the product companies in which are most favorable to their own content, without having to produce any original content of their own.
Technology flawed. It's a prevalent, yet unfortuanate, aspect of our current day society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)